Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95918 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT held that the foreign subsidiary incorporated under UAE law, notwithstanding 100% shareholding by the assessee, cannot be treated as the assessee's proprietorship and its income cannot be taxed as proprietary concern; the Tribunal consistently decided this issue in favour of the assessee. The Tribunal also upheld that electric fittings and installations constitute part of plant and machinery and allowed depreciation at 15% accordingly. Further, payments made to settle a patent infringement dispute were characterised as compensatory commercial expediency and not a penalty or expenditure for a purpose prohibited by law; the disallowance under s.37(1) was deleted and the assessee's related grounds were allowed.
ITAT held that the foreign subsidiary incorporated under UAE law, notwithstanding 100% shareholding by the assessee, cannot be treated as the assessee's proprietorship and its income cannot be taxed as proprietary concern; the Tribunal consistently decided this issue in favour of the assessee. The Tribunal also upheld that electric fittings and installations constitute part of plant and machinery and allowed depreciation at 15% accordingly. Further, payments made to settle a patent infringement dispute were characterised as compensatory commercial expediency and not a penalty or expenditure for a purpose prohibited by law; the disallowance under s.37(1) was deleted and the assessee's related grounds were allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.